On December 19, 1949, the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Armed Forces (an analogue of the General Staff) approved the USSR’s nuclear bombing plan called Dropshot in case of war with the Union. The document provided for the destruction of one hundred Soviet cities by the use of 300 atomic bombs.

Nuclear attack was seen by American strategists as a response to the "aggression" of Moscow or its allies against countries - members of NATO and other US satellites. According to their forecast, an armed conflict between the two blocs could occur in 1957.

After the nuclear bombing of the USSR, the United States intended to launch large-scale front-line operations with its allies, forcing the Kremlin to capitulate. It was assumed that with the help of atomic bombs the main objects of the military infrastructure and key defense enterprises of the Union would be destroyed.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff substantiated the need to use nuclear weapons with the growth of the military-political influence of Moscow, as well as the intensive development of Soviet nuclear potential. Shortly before the adoption of the Dropshot (in August 1949), the USSR successfully tested the first atomic munition RDS-1 (“product 501”).

American strategists also explained their concern by the fact that, according to their calculations, Moscow would be able to launch aerial nuclear bombardments of the United States no later than 1955 and save resources for the "occupation" of Western Europe and the Middle East by 1958.

  • The first Soviet atomic bomb RDS-1 at the Museum of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center in Sarov
  • © Sergey Mamontov / RIA Novosti

“Threatening signal”

The Dropshot was far from the only plan for a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union that Washington prepared at the dawn of the Cold War. September 15, 1945, a month after a nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the US Air Force sent a military leader of the Manhattan Project, Lieutenant General Leslie Groves, a memorandum previously approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The document contains an assessment of the damage that the USSR must inflict during the nuclear bombing. In the list of goals, American analysts included 66 Soviet cities, where the largest industrial centers were located.

With their destruction, as calculated by the Pentagon, the Union could lose the ability to produce 95% of aircraft, 97% of tanks, 88% of trucks, 45% of steel, 95% of oil products. According to calculations, the elimination of the defense potential of the USSR required 204 atomic bombs.

At the end of 1945, the committee of chiefs of staff approved the Totality plan, which provided for nuclear attacks on two dozen Soviet cities. In 1948, American strategists developed the Troyan plan, which suggested the possible destruction of 70 of the largest Soviet settlements.

In the 1950s, the "nuclear appetites" of the United States military command increased markedly. In 1956, the US Air Force Strategic Command developed a document according to which more than 1,200 cities belonging to the "Soviet Bloc, from East Germany to China" were to undergo atomic bombing.

This document is in the electronic archive of the non-governmental American organization National Security Archive, located at George Washington University. An annotation to him was published in December 2015.

In the 1960s, the scattered documents on the preparation of a nuclear attack on the USSR and its allies were replaced by the so-called Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). It is a package of constantly updated documents. In fact, this is a roadmap for the deployment and combat use of components of the US nuclear triad, experts say.

  • US Air Force Strategic Command Long-Range Bomber B-47 Stratojet, atomic bomb carrier
  • © National Nuclear Security Administration / Nevada Site Office

Part of the SIOP documentation was published by the National Security Archive. For example, the list of strategic aviation goals in the United States included socialist Albania at that time, which housed the Soviet radar station. At the same time, the Pentagon realized that after the atomic bomb was dropped, the republic would cease to exist.

Experts interviewed by RT believe that Washington’s plans to launch nuclear strikes against the USSR and its allies became the catalyst for the Cold War and the nuclear arms race. Moscow was forced to intensify intelligence activity and devote significant resources to creating an atomic bomb and its delivery vehicles.

“What constituted the committee of chiefs of staff, especially in the 1940s, is a manifestation of Washington's cynical and aggressive policy. Yes, a geopolitical confrontation between the two systems was inevitable, but the Americans began to prepare a plan for nuclear bombing of the USSR before the end of World War II, in which we were allies, ”retired Colonel Viktor Litovkin said in an interview with RT.

The expert described the DropShot plan as a "hateful act." In his opinion, the development of documents governing a nuclear attack on the USSR and its allies is a crime of the military-political leadership of the United States.

“I would like to draw attention to the fact that US military analysts worked with the filing of the presidential administration and congress. These were deliberate deliberate decisions that did not take into account the contribution of the USSR to the defeat of such an evil as world Nazism. Naturally, in Moscow they read “secret” American documents and were aware of Washington’s two-faced policy, ”said Litovkin.

In turn, a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Vladimir Vinokurov, said in an interview with RT that the United States had left Moscow no choice but to enter the nuclear arms race. According to him, achieving strategic parity with the United States was the only way to ensure the country's security and sovereignty.

“At the end of World War II, the US has already begun to prepare for a possible military confrontation with the USSR. The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary for Washington to demonstrate its determination to deliver a disarming strike against any enemy. It was a threat to Moscow. The Americans made it clear that they were ready to counteract the expansion of the USSR’s influence, including with the help of a nuclear baton, ”said Vinokurov.

Nuclear Club Factor

However, despite the end of the Cold War, the United States continues to adhere to the concept of a preemptive strike using atomic weapons, experts say. This is evidenced by numerous statements by officials and the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, adopted in 2018.

The document involves the deployment of new ballistic missiles and the creation of low-power warheads. Moscow believes that the United States lowers the threshold for the use of atomic weapons by such actions.

In addition, the situation with nuclear arsenal control was significantly complicated by Washington’s withdrawal from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles. In the near future, the Pentagon intends to deploy previously banned ammunition in East Asia. The START III Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty is also in limbo - the prospects for its extension are still unclear.

Washington explains the breakdown of international agreements and the strengthening of its own strategic forces by the growth of nuclear potential from the Russian Federation and China.

At the same time, maintaining the concept of a preemptive nuclear strike, according to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "complicates the decision-making process by the adversaries." Attempts by individual congressmen to reconsider the combat use of the atomic arsenal were unsuccessful.

  • The launch of an American intercontinental ballistic missile
  • Reuters
  • © Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

In a conversation with RT, military expert Yuri Knutov drew attention to the vague nature of doctrinal documents that allow the US president to order a nuclear strike. According to him, the reaction of the White House to various challenges can be "completely unpredictable."

“The concept of a preventive nuclear strike actually holds the whole world in suspense. At the same time, the Russian doctrine is clear and understandable: the Russian Federation, unlike the United States, is guided by the right to a “retaliatory strike”, completely excluding the possibility of nuclear aggression, ”Knutov stated.

In turn, Vladimir Vinokurov believes that Washington’s position is dictated by confidence in the exclusive right to decide the fate of foreign states. In addition, the United States uses the "nuclear baton" factor as a way to maintain global hegemony, the expert is sure.

“US documents on the use of nuclear weapons contradict the current international legal system, which is aimed at maintaining a balance of power and limiting the nuclear race. For the sake of preserving a unipolar world, Washington constantly puts pressure on potential opponents and allies, recalling its readiness to deliver a preemptive nuclear strike, ”Vinokurov concluded.